OpenPKG Packages (Open-Source) http://openpkg.org/

Ralf S. Engelschall ff6908c4de blind update of (perhaps still broken) Mozilla 24 years ago
00DEV b24914da89 adjust paths 24 years ago
a2ps 2eb4da2f3c require flex and bison 24 years ago
amd 8b3d6bbb54 requires also bison 24 years ago
analog 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
antiword 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
apache 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
apg f8baf1e3be fix building 24 years ago
autoconf 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
autogen 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
automake 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
axyftp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bash 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bind 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
binutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
bison 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
boxes 2e46633c36 fix dependencies 24 years ago
bzip2 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
c2man 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
calc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cftp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cpio 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
curl 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cvs 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
cvsweb 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
db 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
dcron 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
delegate 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
dhcpd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
diffutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
dmalloc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
docbook 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
emacs 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
epm 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
exim 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
fetchmail 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
figlet 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
file 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
fileutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
findutils 87c8c259ae Fix installation procedure (determined by src2make) 24 years ago
flawfinder 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
flex 7436e10be8 switch back to the release version 24 years ago
freetype 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gated 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gawk 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gcc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gettext 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ghostscript 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gimp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
glib 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
glimpse 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gnupg 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
graphviz 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
grep 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
grepmail c791cdf678 fixed group 24 years ago
groff 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gtk 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
guile 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gup 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
gzip 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
heise 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
hexer 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
htdig 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
html2latex 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imagemagick 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imapd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
imlib 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
indent 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
infozip 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
inn 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
instant 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
iozone 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ircd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ircii 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
iselect 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ispell 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
its4 c791cdf678 fixed group 24 years ago
jitterbug 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
jpeg 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
kermit 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lame 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
less 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lftp 2e5681fd9f upgrade to lftp 2.4.7 24 years ago
libiconv 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libpcap 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libtool 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libxml 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
libxslt 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
limo 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
links 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lmtp2nntp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
logsurfer 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lrzsz 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lsof 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
lynx 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
m4 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
magicpoint 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mailgrep 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
majordomo 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
make 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
minicom 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mirror 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mkgallery 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mkisofs 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mm 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mng 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mozilla ff6908c4de blind update of (perhaps still broken) Mozilla 24 years ago
mpack 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mpg123 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mtools 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mutt 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
myodbc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
mysql 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nail 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nano 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ncftp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ncurses 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
netcat 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nmap 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
nntpcache 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ntp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openjade 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openldap 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openpkg b371ccd115 fix bootstrap version 24 years ago
openssh 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
openssl 157ac88ac8 fix compilation 24 years ago
orbit 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
par 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
patch 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pcre 649a096604 Fix requirements (found by our src2make) 24 years ago
pdksh 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
perl 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
perl-gd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
perl-ssl 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
petidomo 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pgp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
php 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pinfo 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
png 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
portsentry 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
postfix e0200c1030 upgrade unstable version 24 years ago
prngd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
procmail 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
proftpd 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
psutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pth 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
pureftpd 74fbc72124 upgrade to pure-ftpd 1.0.3 24 years ago
python 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
qpopper 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
qt 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rcs 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
recode 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rfc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rrdtool 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
rsync 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ruby 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
samba 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sasl 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
scanssh 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
screen 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sed 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sendmail 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sfio 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sgml 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sgmlfmt 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sharutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shellutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shiela 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
shtool 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
siege 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sitecopy 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
skey 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
slang 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
smtpfeed 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
snmp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
squid 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ssmtp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
str 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
strace 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
stunnel 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
suck 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
sudo 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tar 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tcl 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tcpdump 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tcsh 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
termutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tetex 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
texinfo 2c1a2a51fc upgrade to 4.0d because 4.0 fails on installation 24 years ago
textutils 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tiff 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
tin 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
txt2man 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
txt2pdf 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
txt2regex 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
units 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
unixodbc 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
ups 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
uucp 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
uudeview 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
vim 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
w3m 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
wget 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
whatmask 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
whois 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
wml 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xdelta 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xmake 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xmame 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
xterm 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zebra 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zlib 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zope 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
zsh 2171079274 Hmmmm.... goodbye good thought out but in practice unusable %{l_branch} variable. We have to use a static value here (implies manual editing again), because else source and binary RPM filenames won't match if binary is built one or more days after the source was rolled. 24 years ago
00README ed12d92e1f Initial revision 24 years ago